Wishful thinking regarding CPU performance. A mobile i5 will beat a desktop Bulldozer, nevermind some crappy Trinity CPU. This will be a good budget gaming platform, with AMD using $100-200 lower prices to compete.

Given the trends in the Western world, sleek aluminum ultrabooks are going to be all the rage. Real gamers will spend extra $ on discrete mid-range graphics. Even lowest end Kepler GT640 should smoke Trinity's performance without any trouble. That means AMD's APU's will continue to remain a niche segment catering to people who can't afford real gaming laptops or don't want Ultrabooks.

I think people forget that for most people the point of a laptop is still portability and battery life. When AMD releases 3 lbs high quality laptops with SSDs that can last 7-8 hours, then we can start talking.

actually BD performs quite good, and AMD says their laptops would last like 12 hours (idle), they can play games without external graphics cards = less power consumption = longer battery life = less heat

did you see the performance of the 640 or are you dreaming, according to leaked benches, trinity would be great

and really cost does affect some markets like the 4B+ in asia ant the ~1B in africa, i think that's more people than in the west

Ya, I did see the performance of GT640M:

Stomps all over AMD 6720G:
http://www.pcper.com/revi...obile/Performance-Verdict

and here it wipes the floor with 6650M:
http://www.anandtech.com/...ife-on-the-kepler-verge/4

If you transpose the % increase of Trinity from Llano, it's not enough to provide for a better rounded system than an Ultrabook + low-end Kepler GPU.

Looks like you are ignoring some important details. From pcper under cooling:

"That’s nothing compared to center-bottom of the laptop, where we read temperatures of up to 128 degrees after playing Battlefield 3 on Ultra. That’s unacceptably warm - it’s hard to imagine using this laptop on anything besides a desk if you want to engage the GPU."

So pretty much once you add in trinity's benefits you get a well balanced cpu + gpu on a single chip which sips power, and should bring games into to 30+ fps area. While maintaining excellent battery life.

Your trying to compare a well thought out piece of engineering (and tweaked for better ipc) to a 2 chip solution that turns the electrons coming from the battery into a fiery inferno that melts the solder off the chip in minutes. I'll let you have fun wasting your money on that. The last nvidia class action settlement was nothing but a farce to make lawyers rich. Have fun with a dead laptop. Guess how many fps that will put out <crickets>

"...and really cost does affect some markets like the 4B+ in asia ant the ~1B in africa, i think that's more people than in the west."

If you read my post more carefully, I said specifically that Trinity will be great for budget/low-end market segments. That's what it was made for. So if you need a $500-600 laptop, sure, Trinity is great.

Did you even read the article? Trinity is supposed to offer up to 12 hours of standby battery life. And since ultrabooks will most likely get a Trinity chip in them there is your sub 3lbs laptop with a ssd option.

Ya, I did read the article. When AMD releases a 3lbs laptop with an SSD that has high quality material aluminum construction with a screen that not the cheapest possible available, and has great battery life not just at idle but at load, then you'll be correct.

An i5 mobile part will get absolutely destroyed by an FX 8150. Stop making things up.

http://AMDFX.blogspot.com

No, it wouldn't. For gaming and general use a mobile core i5 processor with a good discrete GPU card will be faster than any Bulldozer chip with a similar graphics card. Gamers would be better off getting and i3 or i5 laptop + Low-end discrete GPU over any AMD APU. This is especially true for those who play RTS, MMOs, etc. where 2 fast cores are superior to 4 slow cores.

A Core i3-2100 is faster for games than FX-8120.
http://www.tomshardware.c...apu-benchmark,3120-3.html

Don't link biased stuff from AMDFX blog. Show me professional reviews. People who buy laptops don't do 10 hours of rendering daily.

Even Xbitlabs shows this in their reviews:

i3-2120 beats FX-8150 in games
http://www.xbitlabs.com/a...-fx-8120-6100-4100_6.html

So an mobile i5 CPU will be faster for games and consume 90W less power than Bulldozer:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/i...120-6100-4100/power-2.png

all of those use a resolution that's too low for the used video card.

Wut? The desktop version to mobile version is like comparing apples to oranges, so you would never really compare the two

Just trying to stir some hope... lolAm3+ mobo owners (like me) are still waiting for a decent CPU... If all goes as predicted (by amd) only less than 10-15% increase...in desktop piledriver.

Did anyone here say that Ivy Bridge's GPU will be competitive with with Trinity in videogame performance? The point being made is that it's better to buy a Core i3/i5 system with a low-end Kepler/AMD GPU than to buy a Trinity based laptop.

A core i5 beats FX-8150 in most tasks, and especially in games. So your assertion that FX-8150 will beat an i5 is incorrect:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/a...20-6100-4100_5.html#sect1

For most users, a mobile i5 will still be a superior choice than a mobile Bulldozer since it would consume far less power and be faster for the things they normally do - office tasks, games, etc.

Secondly, I run AMD GPUs right now. So to start with you calling me an "Nvidiot" is laughable. If it makes you sleep better at night believing I worship NV, knock yourself out.

Since I am brand agnostic, I have no problems acknowledging that at this current moment, Kepler (GTX680) is a more efficient and faster GPU architecture than GNC (HD7970) is. Similarly, since I look at it on a product by product basis, I'd recommend HD7870 over GTX580. I also think HD6870 is the best bang for the buck GPU right now. At the same time HD7750 and HD7770 are an absolute joke. Even though I run AMD GPUs right now, I have no reservation calling HD7750/ or HD7770 trash, because they are. See how that works when you have no brand loyalty and look at products base don price and price/performance?

Maybe in your small world with 3 brain cells brand loyalty matters; and that's why you had to label me siding with 1 particular brand - NV in this case. In my case I judge computer components on a product by product basis. It's hilarious people keep accusing me of being an NV fanboy every single day of the week, when NV clearly has the superior desktop architecture right now and Kepler's low-end discrete GPUs paired with a Core i3/i5 will have faster performance for games in laptops than Trinity's APU has. That's not fanboism on my part, but facts.

No one said anything about Trinity's APU being weaker than Ivy's GPU.

Your comment that Ivy gets stomped by Trinity...Yes in 1 case only = games! Do you realize most people who buy laptops don't care to play games? And those who go, will go out and buy a laptop that can actually play modern games, i.e., it will have some AMD or NV discrete graphics.

compared to a CPU and separate GPU, the power savings alone should make it interesting for a lot of markets already.